3 ms·

To clarify - say a schoolteacher writes expressing their strongly held personal racist beliefs (without specific reference to how this relates to their teaching

by Jarmsy 4y ago

To clarify - say a schoolteacher writes expressing their strongly held personal racist beliefs (without specific reference to how this relates to their teaching role) would you consider that a reason?

wongarsu 4y ago
That sounds like a great example of the confines of "actions they would take under their authority/power/employment or while on the job", if those racist beliefs are relevant to their teaching job. Or at least something that the school should follow up on to determine if their expressed beliefs lead to unjust actions in the real world.
helge9210 4y ago
A person is schoolteacher by profession. The same person holds a personal belief. The same person writes about personally held belief. There is some distance between job/profession and expressing personal beliefs.
phpisthebest 4y ago
The problem here is what is "racist" If the teacher says "Race X is dumb and can not learn" then yes remove them as they are an educator and racist views on the ability to learn would impact their ability to teach if the teacher says "We should have strong border controls" which is now viewed by the public as racist then no
- Jarmsy 4y ago
  Okay, so it sounds like you do agree with what I actually wrote.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    Your comment was vague to the limits. In modern days cancellation can come from many statements not directly connected to a person's employ, plenty of people have been fired for the social media posting that have NOTHING to do with their employment Thus, when you write "There are absolutely things that people can write which they should be removed from their job" it is interpreted by me (and it seems many others) to be a much wider context than my narrowly focused statement
    - Kbelicius 4y ago
      > Your comment was vague to the limits. In modern days cancellation can come from many statements not directly connected to a person's employ, plenty of people have been fired for the social media posting that have NOTHING to do with their employment So you think that in this case employers and other employees should be denied the right to free association so that a racist can keep their job?
      - endominus 4y ago
        This comment very strongly reminded me of the chain of logic called out in an article recently shared on this site, https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/exiting-vampire-castle/ https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/exiting-vam... > In the febrile McCarthyite atmosphere fermented by the moralising left, remarks that could be construed as sexist mean that Brand is a sexist, which also meant that he is a misogynist. Cut and dried, finished, condemned. It is a rather distressing habit to think in this way.
      - phpisthebest 4y ago
        It is telling that you believe because I said "Someone should not be fired for..." translates to you "Government should prevent someone from being fired for..." Show me where I said employers should be denied any rights?
    - Jarmsy 4y ago
      This whole discussion is rather vague from the start - the only specific example given in the article is Rushdie, but the quote I responded to was much more general. The point I made is that inciting harassment of people's children at school is an entirely different thing to making them lose their job (and we've just agreed that there are some things people can write which they should lose their jobs for), and it's a mistake to lump those things together as the same "unconscionable barbarism" as she does here.
- UncleMeat 4y ago
  > Outside the confines of them making official representation about their employer or actions they would take under their authority/power/employment or while on the job, I do not believe there is anything someone writes for which they should be removed from their job. and > if the teacher says "Race X is dumb and can not learn" then yes remove them as they are an educator seem to be in conflict.
- MrMan 4y ago
  we need more open borders, at least here in North America. we need to bring people in to drive economic growth.
  - phpisthebest 4y ago
    I don't disagree, I support the "One Billion Americans" idea. That has little relevance to if I think someone that disagrees with my position should be fired or accused of racism if they happen to think differently from me
jeltz 4y ago
Nope, because next time it might be for something else. Maybe next year society decides to dislike socialists. Just because I dislike racism and racists does not mean we should fire them for things outside their job.
- Kbelicius 4y ago
  So we should take away the right of free association from employers and other employees so that, in this case, a racist could keep their job?
  - trention 4y ago
    The right of free association was already taken away the moment discrimination on the basis of race was outlawed. Find a better argument.
- nicbou 4y ago
  First they came for the racists And they pretty much stopped there because everyone agrees that it was not comparable to a political belief and deserving of the same protections.
  - trention 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - nicbou 4y ago
      If you want people to consider your opinion charitably, don't preface it with "newsflash"
naasking 4y ago
> To clarify - say a schoolteacher writes expressing their strongly held personal racist beliefs (without specific reference to how this relates to their teaching role) would you consider that a reason? No, unless the bias actually shows up in their marking or treatment of students. People can say they believe all kinds of things but their professed beliefs and their actions don't always align. A job entails certain duties, and "duties" are actions you must perform between certain hours, it does not govern how you should think or what you should believe. Or do you not believe that scientists can be religious too? The problem here is that you do not believe that people can separate their beliefs from their duties, and you want to presumptively and proactively punish people without evidence that their beliefs have compromised their duties.
- spoiler 4y ago
  Alas this rings true: > People can say they believe all kinds of things but their professed beliefs and their actions don't always align. Us software developers often end up doing what we don't believe should be done, in the spirit of getting things done within deadlines!
- gadders 4y ago
  Yes. I think if your private opinions don't affect the carrying out of your work duties, then I don't think they should get you fired.
pannSun 4y ago

by Jarmsy 4y ago

wongarsu 4y ago

That sounds like a great example of the confines of "actions they would take under their authority/power/employment or while on the job", if those racist beliefs are relevant to their teaching job. Or at least something that the school should follow up on to determine if their expressed beliefs lead to unjust actions in the real world.

helge9210 4y ago

A person is schoolteacher by profession. The same person holds a personal belief. The same person writes about personally held belief. There is some distance between job/profession and expressing personal beliefs.

phpisthebest 4y ago

The problem here is what is "racist" If the teacher says "Race X is dumb and can not learn" then yes remove them as they are an educator and racist views on the ability to learn would impact their ability to teach if the teacher says "We should have strong border controls" which is now viewed by the public as racist then no

Jarmsy 4y ago
Okay, so it sounds like you do agree with what I actually wrote.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  Your comment was vague to the limits. In modern days cancellation can come from many statements not directly connected to a person's employ, plenty of people have been fired for the social media posting that have NOTHING to do with their employment Thus, when you write "There are absolutely things that people can write which they should be removed from their job" it is interpreted by me (and it seems many others) to be a much wider context than my narrowly focused statement
  - Kbelicius 4y ago
    > Your comment was vague to the limits. In modern days cancellation can come from many statements not directly connected to a person's employ, plenty of people have been fired for the social media posting that have NOTHING to do with their employment So you think that in this case employers and other employees should be denied the right to free association so that a racist can keep their job?
    - endominus 4y ago
      This comment very strongly reminded me of the chain of logic called out in an article recently shared on this site, https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/exiting-vampire-castle/ https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/exiting-vam... > In the febrile McCarthyite atmosphere fermented by the moralising left, remarks that could be construed as sexist mean that Brand is a sexist, which also meant that he is a misogynist. Cut and dried, finished, condemned. It is a rather distressing habit to think in this way.
    - phpisthebest 4y ago
      It is telling that you believe because I said "Someone should not be fired for..." translates to you "Government should prevent someone from being fired for..." Show me where I said employers should be denied any rights?
  - Jarmsy 4y ago
    This whole discussion is rather vague from the start - the only specific example given in the article is Rushdie, but the quote I responded to was much more general. The point I made is that inciting harassment of people's children at school is an entirely different thing to making them lose their job (and we've just agreed that there are some things people can write which they should lose their jobs for), and it's a mistake to lump those things together as the same "unconscionable barbarism" as she does here.
UncleMeat 4y ago
> Outside the confines of them making official representation about their employer or actions they would take under their authority/power/employment or while on the job, I do not believe there is anything someone writes for which they should be removed from their job. and > if the teacher says "Race X is dumb and can not learn" then yes remove them as they are an educator seem to be in conflict.
MrMan 4y ago
we need more open borders, at least here in North America. we need to bring people in to drive economic growth.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  I don't disagree, I support the "One Billion Americans" idea. That has little relevance to if I think someone that disagrees with my position should be fired or accused of racism if they happen to think differently from me

jeltz 4y ago

Nope, because next time it might be for something else. Maybe next year society decides to dislike socialists. Just because I dislike racism and racists does not mean we should fire them for things outside their job.

Kbelicius 4y ago
So we should take away the right of free association from employers and other employees so that, in this case, a racist could keep their job?
- trention 4y ago
  The right of free association was already taken away the moment discrimination on the basis of race was outlawed. Find a better argument.
nicbou 4y ago
First they came for the racists And they pretty much stopped there because everyone agrees that it was not comparable to a political belief and deserving of the same protections.
- trention 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - nicbou 4y ago
    If you want people to consider your opinion charitably, don't preface it with "newsflash"

naasking 4y ago

> To clarify - say a schoolteacher writes expressing their strongly held personal racist beliefs (without specific reference to how this relates to their teaching role) would you consider that a reason? No, unless the bias actually shows up in their marking or treatment of students. People can say they believe all kinds of things but their professed beliefs and their actions don't always align. A job entails certain duties, and "duties" are actions you must perform between certain hours, it does not govern how you should think or what you should believe. Or do you not believe that scientists can be religious too? The problem here is that you do not believe that people can separate their beliefs from their duties, and you want to presumptively and proactively punish people without evidence that their beliefs have compromised their duties.

spoiler 4y ago
Alas this rings true: > People can say they believe all kinds of things but their professed beliefs and their actions don't always align. Us software developers often end up doing what we don't believe should be done, in the spirit of getting things done within deadlines!
gadders 4y ago
Yes. I think if your private opinions don't affect the carrying out of your work duties, then I don't think they should get you fired.

pannSun 4y ago